Mr. Brewster has written a story about the local need for infrastructure spending to stimulate the economy. Naturally he mentions the Convention Center, but notes that it could get "bogged down in planning".
That is because they do not have a plan yet, they have a want. A plan isn't a plan without a schedule. The City of Seattle could act on that 75 million dollars right now.
3 weeks until the state task force meets. The city can beat the convention center to the finish line with an actionable plan.
Read David Brewster's story here at http://crosscut.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
Well on my end I pretty much beat the skin off the drum regarding the remodel. I was in contact with Nellums people regarding the single-minded emphasis for bringing back the NBA and not looking at bigger picture in regard to refitting the bowl and adding a significant number of seats (1000 to 1500) for multiuse. Not just for the NHL, but possibly the NCAA regionals, the AFL, national conventions,etc... Well I now know that the basketball plan from 2004 when Schultz owned the team, when there still was a team to have here is the ultimate plan with no know alternates as far as I know. I was told by one of Mr. Nellums staffers that to reconfigure the bowl to fit would actually double the cost of the proposed re-model. I seriously doubt her "shot from the hip" assesment. I'm a bit conflicted with this plan frankly. On one hand I hope that the funding package can be approved so we can get a team back. On the other is what I could see another 12 years down the road. The smallest NBA arena in the league, no NCAA regionals, definately no NHL, and no potential. But it aint my money....It's just my vision.
I know it is a lot, but not double the total cost, maybe double the cost to the city or public. Double is a new arena.
I do not think they would want to talk about a change to the scope of work while trying to get funding, it looks like they do not really have their shit together, like the convention center folks.
After state revenues are secure, and as this gets closer to the doing, I would expect this to become a part of the public discussion. The longtime sports writers will bring this up, the city will claim to be poor and only talk about being able to do this with private money. The money will either show up then or not.
Get the money first.
You're right. I'm putting the cart before the horse in this situtation. I'm just not a patient person. The wheels of buracracy turn too slow for me.
Advertise your cart idea to 4 people and they think 4 people are interested, individually saying no, maybe saying yes as a group.
I concur with that we need to get rid of the single mindedness of only getting an NBA franchise, and look towards other alternatives. That why I don't understand the single mindedness of the mayor for stating Key Arena is the "ONLY" option for an arena in the city. It's not helping create ideas to what I would say, FIX the situation.
I personally would love Key Arena to go back to what it was when it was originally create, and exibition hall.
If I could possibly design an arena and place it in the city, I believe one of the best places that could work would be this location.
Go to either maps.google.com or live.maps.com
The location is west of Airport Lane, and north and east of the I-90 Express Lane. 6th Avenue north of I-90 would be gone. Looking at the total size of this lot, it's about the same footprint as the Rose Garden has in Portland.
For the record, (as much as I as can be recorded anonymously), I'm for Key Arena renovation. What I was whining about was the angle that the city is taking as far as their collective intent to remodel nothing more. This option you mention seems like more of a flight of fancy I'm familiar with when I pushed for the Lakeshore Landing site in Renton. Right now this is the card that being dealt And I don't think it's that bad of a hand. I want the funding for the Key to work. When that goal has achieved hopefully there can be a re-evaluation of the re-model since the primary tenant that held 41 dates is no longer there. The cost would have to paid either on public or private side and those costs would have to include loss of renvenue while the venue goes dark while the bowl is reconfigured. Other than that unless someone named, Sabey, Ackerley, Freeman or Bezos jumps out and says "I'm building an arena." I'll stick with the Key proposal for now.
Exhibitions, conventions, they are a step backward for them into less direct revenue and into competition with WSCTC.
There is only one arena in Seattle big enough to have the NBA. Why would they work to ensure less revenue and increased competition?
The google map shows a nice location, not far from one of the potential convention sites, though the King County bus are may be too much trouble, Ron Simms has got to go.
The map also shows few spots to think about using for an arena, B2's problem.
Sabey still has his Tukwila site.
The city will not kick in 75 million dollars, Steve Ballmer will not pay 150 million dollars toward making Seattle Center less attractive to concerts and public events.
I had my drum re-skinned and besides it's my lunch break. But anyway here's something I found of minor interest.
http://www.arenadigest.com/news/index.html?article_id=263
Post a Comment